Well the MiniBrute is already a dream come true, and the Poly remains a dream. Even with Mg's new Sub Phatty (which is double the price of a MiniBrute), the Brute has way more realtime controls and more of a vintage VCO sound (not at hard/sterile in the highs as the Mg) in comparison. Thank you again, Arturia!

Well the MiniBrute is already a dream come true, and the Poly remains a dream. Even with Mg's new Sub Phatty (which is double the price of a MiniBrute), the Brute has way more realtime controls and more of a vintage VCO sound (not at hard/sterile in the highs as the Mg) in comparison. Thank you again, Arturia!

um the Sub Phatty is still pretty damn awesome and is too quite affordable.

Haha, I still cant believe I got such an amazing mono synth for $500, let alone seek for poly, but then mine is brand new. How the heck can you mix so many waveforms from one oscillator at the same time? I obviously dont understand the tech aspects, but truly amazing combos of sounds to produce. fantastic job Arturia!

it would be nice to see a minibrute edition that was a little more advanced, and priced accordingly

same sub osc, two of the osc setups that the minibrute has now, a small amount of presets (something similar to the buttons that the sub phatty has, still don't want screens...i'm thinking a bank knob + patch knob), which would also mean full automation.

throw all of that on a 3 octave keybed with the same great aftertouch and voila, you have a Mg killer

That would mean that every single control of the synth would need to have a digital-analog interface to the preset storage chips.

That's one of the reasons the sub phatty is twice the price. What it might lack in features it has in Mg stability and warmth (to use the common buzz word), and the whole extra digital-analog layer of circuitry, which allows for the preset storage, the MIDI CC control, the software VST settings interface.

TBH, I wouldn't want the preset storage. I dunno, the idea of it is just a little off-putting to me. I like the simplicity, the feeling that what's in front of you is always exactly what the synth is doing. It forces you to really become familiar with all the controls, to be able to patch up a given sound easily enough to make up for the lack of instant preset recall.

To get back to the original question, I think that trying to make a poly brute would be trying to make something out of the brute which is simply isn't. The architecture, the sound of it, whatever, I don't think would directly translate well to a poly synth.Arturia making an analog poly with the experience they have from the brute? Sure! But I don't think it should necessarily try to be categorized under the same name as the original brute.

VCO based analog polysynth keyboards are not being made for mass production by anyone currently. DSI are the only ones with analog polys (DCO) currently in mass production. Arturia has experience in VCO analog now, and I was hopeful they would put out a poly Brute, but Bruno says "no plans". A VCO poly of Minibrute quality could be superior to DCOs in vintage sound, and sell well - lots of folks want a new vintage sounding VCO poly, as evidenced massively on internet community analog boards such is this post:

Bruno, could you tell us why analog vco poly keyboard synths are not being mass produced by anyone, including Arturia? Is it that profit margins are too small, or . I would that thought that with SMT tech, you could made a 5-6 voice vco poly under $2k and still have a good profit, and it would be a decent seller as a true VCO alternative to Dave Smith's DCO analog polys (Mopho X4 and Prophet 08). What is the reality however?

the reality is that polyphony is complicated and not cheap. but for what it's worth, there ARE companies making poly synths today... for example - studio electronics. dig deeper ... and also, sell 1 of your kidneys in the black market.